Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • apologies if I'm being dense, doesn't that open me up to the risk of a backdoor ccj? They still have my parents address for me. (I *may* come back to the UK someday!)
    • Fraudsters copy the details of firms we authorise to try and convince people that their firm is genuine. Find out why you shouldn’t deal with this clone firm.View the full article
    • I take it I should redact names, court numbers etc?
    • How climate risk is changing lending decisionsView the full article
    • I understand that the item was correctly declared but the value was under declared. When you enter into any kind of contract, there has to be in agreement as to exactly what is being exchange for what. You agree to pay a certain amount of money for the delivery. They agreed in return for that to carry out the delivery safely – but they also agreed to shoulder a certain level of risk based on your own valuation. This means that the value that you gave for the chair is what they reasonably expected to be the extent of their risk in the event that the item was lost or damaged – or stolen. I'm afraid that by undervaluing it, our view is that you would be unlikely to recover anything more. There is never any advantage in declaring and undervalue. It effectively gives a gift to the service provider because when something goes wrong then that becomes the extend their liability. If you want to try and sue for the proper value then we will be happy to help you but I don't rate your chances. If you want to sue for the undervalue then I think your chances are extremely high. The item was lost – it wasn't damaged. Even if it was damaged, there was no particular suggestion that not being flat packed in some way contributed to the risk of damage but certainly it is impossible to conceive how being flat packed or not flat packed would affect the risk of the chair been lost. In fact in my view, because the item was a large item one would imagine that it would be more difficult to lose it. If you want to continue with this claim either for the full value of the undervalue then we will be happy to support you. Please make sure you've done the reading. I can tell that you've done some reading but I'm afraid the fact that you don't appear to have appreciated the consequence of an undervaluation suggest to me that you haven't read very thoroughly. I think it is important to make sure that you understand the principles of claiming for failed parcel deliveries completely. It will put you in control. It will give you confidence. There is no downside. Do the reading. Post a draft documents here so we can check before you send them off.
  • Our picks

    • If you are buying a used car – you need to read this survival guide.
      • 1 reply
    • Hello,

      On 15/1/24 booked appointment with Big Motoring World (BMW) to view a mini on 17/1/24 at 8pm at their Enfield dealership.  

      Car was dirty and test drive was two circuits of roundabout on entry to the showroom.  Was p/x my car and rushed by sales exec and a manager into buying the mini and a 3yr warranty that night, sale all wrapped up by 10pm.  They strongly advised me taking warranty out on car that age (2017) and confirmed it was honoured at over 500 UK registered garages.

      The next day, 18/1/24 noticed amber engine warning light on dashboard , immediately phoned BMW aftercare team to ask for it to be investigated asap at nearest garage to me. After 15 mins on hold was told only their 5 service centres across the UK can deal with car issues with earliest date for inspection in March ! Said I’m not happy with that given what sales team advised or driving car. Told an amber warning light only advisory so to drive with caution and call back when light goes red.

      I’m not happy to do this, drive the car or with the after care experience (a sign of further stresses to come) so want a refund and to return the car asap.

      Please can you advise what I need to do today to get this done. 
       

      Many thanks 
      • 81 replies
    • Housing Association property flooding. https://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/topic/438641-housing-association-property-flooding/&do=findComment&comment=5124299
      • 162 replies
    • We have finally managed to obtain the transcript of this case.

      The judge's reasoning is very useful and will certainly be helpful in any other cases relating to third-party rights where the customer has contracted with the courier company by using a broker.
      This is generally speaking the problem with using PackLink who are domiciled in Spain and very conveniently out of reach of the British justice system.

      Frankly I don't think that is any accident.

      One of the points that the judge made was that the customers contract with the broker specifically refers to the courier – and it is clear that the courier knows that they are acting for a third party. There is no need to name the third party. They just have to be recognisably part of a class of person – such as a sender or a recipient of the parcel.

      Please note that a recent case against UPS failed on exactly the same issue with the judge held that the Contracts (Rights of Third Parties) Act 1999 did not apply.

      We will be getting that transcript very soon. We will look at it and we will understand how the judge made such catastrophic mistakes. It was a very poor judgement.
      We will be recommending that people do include this adverse judgement in their bundle so that when they go to county court the judge will see both sides and see the arguments against this adverse judgement.
      Also, we will be to demonstrate to the judge that we are fair-minded and that we don't mind bringing everything to the attention of the judge even if it is against our own interests.
      This is good ethical practice.

      It would be very nice if the parcel delivery companies – including EVRi – practised this kind of thing as well.

       

      OT APPROVED, 365MC637, FAROOQ, EVRi, 12.07.23 (BRENT) - J v4.pdf
        • Like

Tax credit compliance interview..


pickles2k

Recommended Posts

I had the call today and I’m confused about the outcome ...

  I was honest and said he lived here during the dates mentioned

they said they were stopping the claim now 

but said I can apply for universal credit as a joint claim if I wish and that was it..

. no mention of repayment

no mention of caution,

call lasted about 3 mins ..

  I’m confused myself so just waiting to see if any follow up stuff comes

Link to post
Share on other sites

well what ever they decide ensure via an sar they have the written evidence to prove their claim.

this might be the crux behind their answer...you've said so, but ofcourse an honest answer is not a substitute of real provable evidence.

 

this is why we say never panic, lots of supposed tigers have no real teeth.....

please don't hit Quote...just type we know what we said earlier..

DCA's view debtors as suckers, marks and mugs

NO DCA has ANY legal powers whatsoever on ANY debt no matter what it's Type

and they

are NOT and can NEVER  be BAILIFFS. even if a debt has been to court..

If everyone stopped blindly paying DCA's Tomorrow, their industry would collapse overnight... 

Link to post
Share on other sites

They've stopped the claim as you told them you were no longer a single claimant so a change of circumstances triggers a move to universal credit which has now replaced tax credits.

HMRC will contact you at a later date with the amount which you have been overpaid and will expect you to repay it.

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

So... “they might just leave it at that”

isnt a likely option then 🙈

 

I was expecting them to say I’d overpaid and I’d need to repay or interview under caution or whatever but it was just, claims been cancelled, if you want to do a new joint claim you can, and that was it 

 

sometimes it’s the not knowing that hurts.. guess it’s just a waiting game to see what they either A. Try and dig up or B. What the overpayment was

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 3 years later...

what happened?
dx

 

please don't hit Quote...just type we know what we said earlier..

DCA's view debtors as suckers, marks and mugs

NO DCA has ANY legal powers whatsoever on ANY debt no matter what it's Type

and they

are NOT and can NEVER  be BAILIFFS. even if a debt has been to court..

If everyone stopped blindly paying DCA's Tomorrow, their industry would collapse overnight... 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...